Us men will forever objectify women, and to a lesser extent them us. I find Rihanna spectacularly beautiful, unimaginably beautiful and sexy- and it is not for her voice because I cannot stand any of her records aside from Umbrella.
I'm not familiar with the said young lady's oeuvre, but from a quick look on YouTube she seems to be a soft-porn performer with no musical talent. I'm not quite sure why Page 3 should be regarded as more objectionable.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
Apocalypse- my point is that we cannot afford to stop immigration. We rely on it for our basic services, and for economic growth. Any meaningful studies show that mass immigration benefits the economy. And so benefits our public services through filling staff shortages, and paying the taxes that keeps them going.
Of course many immigrants go into shitty accommodation. But I've done too, when I was young, trying to improve myself. But many of them rise out of it like I did.
We should be pleased that we are a country that both attracts immigrants, and that benefits from immigration.
@tyson I'm not saying that immigration doesn't have its benefits - my own grandparents were immigrants, and I don't agree with an awful lot of UKIP's rhetoric on the issue. I'm not advocating that immigration should be stopped entirely, either. But cheap labour means wages - and thus living standards - are getting undercut, and many immigrants come here and live in rubbish conditions - creating even more poverty and inequality. We need to know that if immigrants are coming here we can afford it: in terms of education, housing, the NHS etc. And I think we can't afford large-scale immigration.
Immigration makes the rich richer and the poor poorer... If the increased wealth of the rich is marginally larger than the decrease in wages of the poor, the net benefit to the economy is still bad for the nation as a whole
Automation makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, because it means that fewer people are employed, and therefore drives down the wages of the poor in society. If the increased wealth of the rich is marginally larger than the decrease in wages of the poor, the net benefit to the economy is still bad for the nation as a whole
Obviously, my statement is rubbish. I wouldn't deny it. But your statement was lazy because it ignores second order effects.
Conservative HOLD Witney North (West Oxfordshire). Witney North (W Oxfordshire) result: CON - 33.9% (-9.6) LDEM - 25.8% (+14.2) GRN - 17.5% (-10.2) LAB - 14.6% (-2.7) UKIP - 8.2% (+8.2) So far so good
Indeed yes, Mr Pauly - with the Lib Dems bouncing up very nicely. The Tory vote falling heavily in what I suppose must be Mr Cameron´s own seat. Yes, so far, so good.
The obvious question in a council by election is, did the LD vote go up or did it just fall less in a deeply reduced turnout?
'On law, it's one of those oversubscribed degrees now. Everyone wants to be a lawyer, but not everyone will be.'
Yes, massively oversubscribed with yearly training contracts only available for approx. 50% of law graduates. But still a very good degree to have and recognized as such by employers.
Really? I was advised that if you're not sure you want to be a lawyer, don't do law. I also don't think a law degree is worth much unless it's from a very very top uni, and you can get into a grad scheme.
Law is a well respected degree which has a reputation for being particularly difficult. I can't think of many non STEM degrees where the same can be said.
As I said: it depends where you go. A law degree from St Andrews is respected - but one from Westminster? Most likely not.
St Andrews does not teach law. Once upon a time it was conjoined with Dundee University and when they split Law stayed with Dundee.
Okay, I just presumed most unis did - but for argument's sake I'll change it to Dundee.
A very fine University (if not with the cache of St Andrews). Went there myself and was lucky enough to meet my wife there.
Your debate on objectification has been interesting. Personally, I can look at a pretty girl and think she is pretty but I don't lust after her in the sense that I would want sexual contact with her. That is something you should have with those you love and they are not objects. If sex is about self gratification it is pretty poor fare. Maybe I am even older than I think.
Tbh I think among men you're quite rare. I've definitely never heard any guy of my generation think that way - most do think of sex as about self-gratification, in my experience.
That's quite sad. They don't know what they are missing.
I don't know if @Casino_Royale is on the board tonight, but he made a comment yesterday about the 800,000 asylum seekers in Germany becoming German citizens, and therefore potentially ending up in the UK.
Germany is probably the European country where it is hardest to become a citizen (harder than Switzerland or Norway, for example). Being born there is not enough. Being born there and having a German dad is not enough. There is a minimum eight year wait, and that's after getting all the appropriate residence permits (which can take two to three years). And then you are required to prove that are you not going to be a drain on the German taxpayer.
Germany has a large immigrant community of Turks, many of whom were born there, to parents who have worked there a decade or more, and few of whom are entitled to citizenship.
The places in Europe where it is easiest to get citizenship are: Portugal, the UK and Switzerland.
I've mentioned this before on here about asylum seekers in other EU countries getting pass ports and heading here is already on the rise .
My point is that Germany is the worst place to go if you want to get an EU passport and head to the UK. It'll take you at least a decade to get a German passport, if you can get one at all. (Germany has 1.5m Turks with permanent residence, of which just 50,000 or so - 3% - become eligible for German citizenship in any given year.)
Not necessarily that they think of their personality, but they certainly won't believe that their partner exists purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
At the moment of lust, I don't think most people entertain complex thoughts. I also don't think a Sun reader believes a Page 3 girl exists purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
Is it really a complex thought not to see your partner as just there for your pleasure? I don't think it is.
And after seeing Sun readers viewing Page 3 girls, I'd yes, they do believe that girl does exist purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
I know I've asked this before but you avoided answering.
How do you actually process women into BDSM as the sub, women into DD/LG and women into rape fantasies? These (relatively common) paraphilias do not fit in with your worldview.
I didn't avoid answering it: you just disagreed with my argument. I've said before that most women don't have rape fantasies for a start: and for those that do, they are generally infrequent and differ from rape fantasies depicted in online porn - where the woman generally isn't enjoying. Secondly, whether it is even a 'rape fantasy' is open to question - it's more of a woman 'being taken' than actually been forced to have sex against her will.
On BDSM - while spanking may be common, full on BDSM sub-dom relationships, are far less common.
I think the widespread interest in Fifty Shades suggests that such desires are actually not uncommon in women. The old adage "treat them mean, keep them keen" and the female equivalent of "playing hard to get" are still in large part true. Of course for an old liberal like me it never worked, as I was not capable of being mean enough!
Tbh there's even a debate whether 50 shades actually represented a real sub/dom relationship. Personally, I think it was a combination of hype and curiosity that led to such wide interest in it. I believe there was a recent study done on Britain's sex habits, and it didn't really show that BDSM relationships were that common.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Gunner Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
Not necessarily that they think of their personality, but they certainly won't believe that their partner exists purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
At the moment of lust, I don't think most people entertain complex thoughts. I also don't think a Sun reader believes a Page 3 girl exists purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
Is it really a complex thought not to see your partner as just there for your pleasure? I don't think it is.
And after seeing Sun readers viewing Page 3 girls, I'd yes, they do believe that girl does exist purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
I know I've asked this before but you avoided answering.
How do you actually process women into BDSM as the sub, women into DD/LG and women into rape fantasies? These (relatively common) paraphilias do not fit in with your worldview.
I didn't avoid answering it: you just disagreed with my argument. I've said before that most women don't have rape fantasies for a start: and for those that do, they are generally infrequent and differ from rape fantasies depicted in online porn - where the woman generally isn't enjoying. Secondly, whether it is even a 'rape fantasy' is open to question - it's more of a woman 'being taken' than actually been forced to have sex against her will.
On BDSM - while spanking may be common, full on BDSM sub-dom relationships, are far less common.
I didn't disagree with your argument, I don't see you putting forward an argument, instead your trying to redefine the terms to fit your worldview. Rape fantasies exist without exposure to online porn and the definition of "enjoying" really is far more difficult than you seem to want to accept.
I think the main problem is that you don't understand just how common these are 40% of women have rape fantasies, 65% of women have Sub fantasies.
I DO understand how common they are. In no way is 40% a majority of women in regard to rape fantasies. Secondly, it is UP TO 40% of women - generally the figure is somewhere between 25% to 40%. Secondly, your link on BDSM says that the sample is not even representative of the broader population. And thirdly, I did not say that online porn influenced these fantasties - I was making a comparison.
I DID put forward an argument regarding the influence of the media - which you didn't accept.
The problem with the psychosis hypothesis is that it requires psychoses to be far more prevalent than any evidence I have seen would indicate.
Paraphilias are neuroses rather than psychoses. Psychoses require delusional states and are very rarely sexual. Neuroses very often are sexual, hence psycho analysts and psychotherapists interest in them.
Apologies for the incorrect terminology, I'm not an expert.
I do wonder, as you say in your first post, that the literature is attempting to draw a link to psychological distubance, this still indicates way higher levels of such things than I would think is reasonably likely.
At what stage does something which is near universal stop being a neurosis and start being just "how people are".
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Gunner Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
weak weak weak
the non apology apology
its crap and you know it.
Get it in your (I hope temporarily) thick head, it's not any kind of an apology.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
If you want to come up with apologies for the IRA, you have to expect to be challenged. Don't get all offended by it.
'On law, it's one of those oversubscribed degrees now. Everyone wants to be a lawyer, but not everyone will be.'
Yes, massively oversubscribed with yearly training contracts only available for approx. 50% of law graduates. But still a very good degree to have and recognized as such by employers.
Really? I was advised that if you're not sure you want to be a lawyer, don't do law. I also don't think a law degree is worth much unless it's from a very very top uni, and you can get into a grad scheme.
Law is a well respected degree which has a reputation for being particularly difficult. I can't think of many non STEM degrees where the same can be said.
As I said: it depends where you go. A law degree from St Andrews is respected - but one from Westminster? Most likely not.
St Andrews does not teach law. Once upon a time it was conjoined with Dundee University and when they split Law stayed with Dundee.
Okay, I just presumed most unis did - but for argument's sake I'll change it to Dundee.
A very fine University (if not with the cache of St Andrews). Went there myself and was lucky enough to meet my wife there.
Your debate on objectification has been interesting. Personally, I can look at a pretty girl and think she is pretty but I don't lust after her in the sense that I would want sexual contact with her. That is something you should have with those you love and they are not objects. If sex is about self gratification it is pretty poor fare. Maybe I am even older than I think.
Tbh I think among men you're quite rare. I've definitely never heard any guy of my generation think that way - most do think of sex as about self-gratification, in my experience.
I think that you are experience of men is one of selection bias. There are a number of very men who make sexual passes very frequently (also true of some gay men, when I was young I was always being hit on!). Such a fellow will flit from girl to girl and may be knocked back a dozen times by different girls, before going home with one. The more sensitive sorts will retreat to the bar or to watch the band after the first rebuff, if they summon the courage to approach someone they fancy at all. If you want a sensitive bloke then you have to make the first move, they are likely to be grateful!
Not necessarily that they think of their personality, but they certainly won't believe that their partner exists purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
At the moment of lust, I don't think most people entertain complex thoughts. I also don't think a Sun reader believes a Page 3 girl exists purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
Is it really a complex thought not to see your partner as just there for your pleasure? I don't think it is.
And after seeing Sun readers viewing Page 3 girls, I'd yes, they do believe that girl does exist purely for their entertainment and pleasure.
I know I've asked this before but you avoided answering.
How do you actually process women into BDSM as the sub, women into DD/LG and women into rape fantasies? These (relatively common) paraphilias do not fit in with your worldview.
I didn't avoid answering it: you just disagreed with my argument. I've said before that most women don't have rape fantasies for a start: and for those that do, they are generally infrequent and differ from rape fantasies depicted in online porn - where the woman generally isn't enjoying. Secondly, whether it is even a 'rape fantasy' is open to question - it's more of a woman 'being taken' than actually been forced to have sex against her will.
On BDSM - while spanking may be common, full on BDSM sub-dom relationships, are far less common.
I think the widespread interest in Fifty Shades suggests that such desires are actually not uncommon in women. The old adage "treat them mean, keep them keen" and the female equivalent of "playing hard to get" are still in large part true. Of course for an old liberal like me it never worked, as I was not capable of being mean enough!
Tbh there's even a debate whether 50 shades actually represented a real sub/dom relationship. Personally, I think it was a combination of hype and curiosity that led to such wide interest in it. I believe there was a recent study done on Britain's sex habits, and it didn't really show that BDSM relationships were that common.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
Conservative HOLD Witney North (West Oxfordshire). Witney North (W Oxfordshire) result: CON - 33.9% (-9.6) LDEM - 25.8% (+14.2) GRN - 17.5% (-10.2) LAB - 14.6% (-2.7) UKIP - 8.2% (+8.2) So far so good
Indeed yes, Mr Pauly - with the Lib Dems bouncing up very nicely. The Tory vote falling heavily in what I suppose must be Mr Cameron´s own seat. Yes, so far, so good.
The obvious question in a council by election is, did the LD vote go up or did it just fall less in a deeply reduced turnout?
Between 2012 and now, the Lib Dem vote went up from 136 to 201, Mr Quidder. The Conservative vote fell from 450 to 264.
The Conservative vote in May this year was 1120; the Lib Dems did not even have a candidate then.
Us men will forever objectify women, and to a lesser extent them us. I find Rihanna spectacularly beautiful, unimaginably beautiful and sexy- and it is not for her voice because I cannot stand any of her records aside from Umbrella.
I'm not familiar with the said young lady's oeuvre, but from a quick look on YouTube she seems to be a soft-porn performer with no musical talent. I'm not quite sure why Page 3 should be regarded as more objectionable.
Well done Richard. You've just made me really laugh- in a nice way. My wife's mother is quite sick tonight, so that is a very good thing.
I don't know what quite to say to bring you up to modernity. Times move on from Babs Windsor in Carry on Camping to Rihanna. The end result may be quite similar to us blokes, but somehow it feels like we have moved on forty years. I cannot explain the whys and wherefores. Someone else please.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
If you want to come up with apologies for the IRA, you have to expect to be challenged. Don't get all offended by it.
The intellectual paucity of the challenge is slightly offensive tbh.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
If you want to come up with apologies for the IRA, you have to expect to be challenged. Don't get all offended by it.
The intellectual paucity of the challenge is slightly offensive tbh.
Whatever. You made a fool of yourself, and then tried to bluster your way out of it.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I'm still not getting how your definition of "being overpowered" is different to what would normally be considered rape (i.e. without consent).
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I think I am going to have to draw a line on this course of discussion. Moderator! Where are you? Can you hear me out there?
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Gunner Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
weak weak weak
the non apology apology
its crap and you know it.
Get it in your (I hope temporarily) thick head, it's not any kind of an apology.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
If you want to come up with apologies for the IRA, you have to expect to be challenged. Don't get all offended by it.
The intellectual paucity of the challenge is slightly offensive tbh.
Whatever. You made a fool of yourself, and then tried to bluster your way out of it.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
If you want to come up with apologies for the IRA, you have to expect to be challenged. Don't get all offended by it.
The intellectual paucity of the challenge is slightly offensive tbh.
Whatever. You made a fool of yourself, and then tried to bluster your way out of it.
Terrorist sympathiser>IRA supporter>Lee Rigby had it coming>Holocaust denier>whatever. Fuck off>cunty>fuck you
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I'm still not getting how your definition of "being overpowered" is different to what would normally be considered rape (i.e. without consent).
Then you don't have a proper understanding of the nature of consent within the confines of a a BDSM (or related) relationship.
If you did, you would understand how they are built on trust, communication and consent. There should always be a proper dialogue as to the detail of what both parties expect and will allow.
It is perfectly possible to establish the parameters for 'rape' play that are fully consensual - it is just that the scenario has been negotiated in advance.
It is a grey area of the law (post-Spanner) but proper BDSM is not about abuse - it is all about consent and communication.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I'm still not getting how your definition of "being overpowered" is different to what would normally be considered rape (i.e. without consent).
Then you don't have a proper understanding of the nature of consent within the confines of a a BDSM (or related) relationship.
If you did, you would understand how they are built on trust, communication and consent. There should always be a proper dialogue as to the detail of what both parties expect and will allow.
It is perfectly possible to establish the parameters for 'rape' play that are fully consensual - it is just that the scenario has been negotiated in advance.
It is a grey area of the law (post-Spanner) but proper BDSM is not about abuse - it is all about consent and communication.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I'm still not getting how your definition of "being overpowered" is different to what would normally be considered rape (i.e. without consent).
Then you don't have a proper understanding of the nature of consent within the confines of a a BDSM (or related) relationship.
If you did, you would understand how they are built on trust, communication and consent. There should always be a proper dialogue as to the detail of what both parties expect and will allow.
It is perfectly possible to establish the parameters for 'rape' play that are fully consensual - it is just that the scenario has been negotiated in advance.
It is a grey area of the law (post-Spanner) but proper BDSM is not about abuse - it is all about consent and communication.
Perhaps you've misread, the discussion is about the underlying fantasies that lead to the choice of relationship, not how that relationship functions once agreed upon.
No-one is choosing a BDSM or similar relationship because they fantasise about communication. They do it because they have an underlying desire to be Sub, Dom or Switch.
Dr Fox- quite how you can make a link from the very lovely Rihanna to ISISS is really quite commendable and worthy of pbCOM's mission statement.
Let's hope that Lewis Hamilton, a good christian boy, treats her better than the other one.
But, as my wife knows and fully understands, I think she would forgive me having a quick fling with Rihanna if circumstances permitted. Similarly, I would turn a blind eye to Brad Pitt and Hugh Jackman.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I'm still not getting how your definition of "being overpowered" is different to what would normally be considered rape (i.e. without consent).
The difference is mainly the woman enjoying it, but the idea is that someone is so attracted to you that they cannot control themselves (so losing power in a way), and thus the woman is overpowered. Whereas rape is generally not about sex, lust or attraction, but about power.
It's certainly not an apology. If you go off on one at the bare reproduction of some text on Wiki, your skin thinness is obviously at gold leaf levels.
It's a great recurring PB theme, those with little experience or knowledge of one place in these little islands feeling perfectly entitled to comment in the most disobliging terms upon that place, while on a hair trigger about their own shibboleths.
If you support the IRA just say so. It's like people who obviously wish the holocaust had taken place, but waste lots of breath denying it ever happened.
Godwin..KABOOM!
You can try and divert all you wish but the tone of the thread is you're out of line and can't admit it.
Yeah, a PB rent-a-reactionary brings in Lee Rigby and Holocaust denial and I'm diverting.
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
If you want to come up with apologies for the IRA, you have to expect to be challenged. Don't get all offended by it.
"a gang of squalid murderers" Winston Churchill, on the IRA, led by Michael Collins, 1919
“He was an Irish patriot true and fearless.” Winston Churchill, on Michael Collins, leader of the IRA, 1922...
Dr Fox- quite how you can make a link from the very lovely Rihanna to ISISS is really quite commendable and worthy of pbCOM's mission statement.
Let's hope that Lewis Hamilton, a good christian boy, treats her better than the other one.
But, as my wife knows and fully understands, I think she would forgive me having a quick fling with Rihanna if circumstances permitted. Similarly, I would turn a blind eye to Brad Pitt and Hugh Jackman.
A good deal of romantic and erotic literature, much of it written by women, does involve rape fantasies (eg Anne Rice's Beauty novels, or Diane Gabaldon's hugely popular Highlander series). It seems to be a common trope.
I'd say that's more of the 'being taken' variety than actually fantasising about someone having sex with you against your will.
What exactly is your definition of "being taken".
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
Being overpowered, and then enjoying it would be my definition.
I'm still not getting how your definition of "being overpowered" is different to what would normally be considered rape (i.e. without consent).
The difference is mainly the woman enjoying it, but the idea is that someone is so attracted to you that they cannot control themselves (so losing power in a way), and thus the woman is overpowered. Whereas rape is generally not about sex, lust or attraction, but about power.
And it is not just women who are 'overpowered' in such relationships. It is not restricted to heterosexual partners!
Gosh reading the thread tonight I am reminded by my nephew who has just started as a junior doctor in an urban hospital in the UK. All this talk of kinky sex, Dair, Apocalypse at al- I don't think there is another expression for it.
He has encountered in his first few weeks four men (straight and gay) with lacerations through their sphincter by immersing objects- deodorant cans and wotnot.
I can't quite see where any pleasure comes in any of this. Apparently there is G spot somewhere up there, but it all sounds very painful.
Anyway, on that happy note, I am off to sleep and to dream happily of Rihanna
I think Kim is losing his grip and one of Communisms last regimes is in its death throes.
maybe a poor crop of maize again, or something similar. Most likely the regime will stay in place until it suits China not to support them any more
I'm surprised that China continues to prop up the North Korean regime. It doesn't seem to offer the China of 2015 any real benefit. Whereas the resulting economic problems Re-Unification might cause for South Korea would seriously undermine one of their two biggest regional rivals.
Re-Unification of Korea would be several orders of magnitude more of a challenge than Germany faced.
On the Clinton emails, today we learned that she used her own Blackberry - i.e. not government encryption standards - and ditto her own iPad while SOS.
Her judgment is looking ever more questionable. When you get a clearance they sit you down and tell you in detail what you have to do - and NOT do. She seems to have ignored the whole thing.
Dr Fox- quite how you can make a link from the very lovely Rihanna to ISISS is really quite commendable and worthy of pbCOM's mission statement.
Let's hope that Lewis Hamilton, a good christian boy, treats her better than the other one.
But, as my wife knows and fully understands, I think she would forgive me having a quick fling with Rihanna if circumstances permitted. Similarly, I would turn a blind eye to Brad Pitt and Hugh Jackman.
Don't forget - your numbers are never higher than the day before you announce. As soon as he's in the race, all the gaffes will be on TV all over the place.
But the Democrats are clearly worried about Hillary's FBI problem, and pressure is building on him to run.
Dr Fox- quite how you can make a link from the very lovely Rihanna to ISISS is really quite commendable and worthy of pbCOM's mission statement.
Let's hope that Lewis Hamilton, a good christian boy, treats her better than the other one.
But, as my wife knows and fully understands, I think she would forgive me having a quick fling with Rihanna if circumstances permitted. Similarly, I would turn a blind eye to Brad Pitt and Hugh Jackman.
Not venturing an opinion on most of the thread, but just to reply to Alex - I've always said that I don't make stuff up here but I don't necessarily report everything (I doubt if anyone does tbh). I was pretty confident in Broxtowe and had three reasons to think the Tories shared my assessment - might have been wrong, but I genuinely thought it. As the campaign approached the end I thought things were going increasingly wrong, and that the Tories had renewed their effort, but it seemed, well, unwise to say so. I've apologised to anyone who was misled by my earlier confidence, and will do so again - that's all I can say, really.
As I'm not playing an active role now, I don't really need to be selective anyway, so WYSIWYG.
I think Kim is losing his grip and one of Communisms last regimes is in its death throes.
maybe a poor crop of maize again, or something similar. Most likely the regime will stay in place until it suits China not to support them any more
I'm surprised that China continues to prop up the North Korean regime. It doesn't seem to offer the China of 2015 any real benefit. Whereas the resulting economic problems Re-Unification might cause for South Korea would seriously undermine one of their two biggest regional rivals.
Re-Unification of Korea would be several orders of magnitude more of a challenge than Germany faced.
I'm not expert and it is something of a mystery. I suppose a reinvigorated united korea would likely eventually be more assertive in border disputes with China tho (and China is certainly thinking the long game– their current foreign policy seems to be about righting affronts to Chinese pride starting from the 19th century..)
On a practical level I suppose they don't want any shocks to their economy which looks fairly unpredictable without any outside events
I think Kim is losing his grip and one of Communisms last regimes is in its death throes.
maybe a poor crop of maize again, or something similar. Most likely the regime will stay in place until it suits China not to support them any more
I'm surprised that China continues to prop up the North Korean regime. It doesn't seem to offer the China of 2015 any real benefit. Whereas the resulting economic problems Re-Unification might cause for South Korea would seriously undermine one of their two biggest regional rivals.
Re-Unification of Korea would be several orders of magnitude more of a challenge than Germany faced.
I'm not expert and it is something of a mystery. I suppose a reinvigorated united korea would likely eventually be more assertive in border disputes with China tho (and China is certainly thinking the long game– their current foreign policy seems to be about righting affronts to Chinese pride starting from the 19th century..)
On a practical level I suppose they don't want any shocks to their economy which looks fairly unpredictable without any outside events
My understanding is that China props up the NK regime because collapse would mean hundreds of thousands swarming across into China as refugees.
@ Dair and @ DuGarbandier. The Gospel according to the Washington Post- why China props up NK in six words:
"No war, no instability, no nukes.
"It's as much a strategy as it is a mantra, often rendered in the original Chinese: 不战、不乱、无核. And the order matters, listing China's priorities from highest to lowest.
"The first priority -- no war -- goes back to the Korean War, which cost hundreds of thousands of Chinese lives and almost ended with a unified, pro-American Korea right on China's border: Beijing's nightmare.
"The second priority -- no instability -- means that Beijing wants to keep North Korea from collapsing, which could cause China all sorts of problems -- streams of Korean refugees, loose nuclear materials (see priority No. 3) and the risk of the war that China so wants to avoid.
"The third priority -- no nukes -- is clearly last of these three, as China would prefer a stable and nuclear North Korea to an unstable but nuke-free one. But it's still a big priority."
@ Dair and @ DuGarbandier. The Gospel according to the Washington Post- why China props up NK in six words:
"No war, no instability, no nukes.
"It's as much a strategy as it is a mantra, often rendered in the original Chinese: 不战、不乱、无核. And the order matters, listing China's priorities from highest to lowest.
"The first priority -- no war -- goes back to the Korean War, which cost hundreds of thousands of Chinese lives and almost ended with a unified, pro-American Korea right on China's border: Beijing's nightmare.
"The second priority -- no instability -- means that Beijing wants to keep North Korea from collapsing, which could cause China all sorts of problems -- streams of Korean refugees, loose nuclear materials (see priority No. 3) and the risk of the war that China so wants to avoid.
"The third priority -- no nukes -- is clearly last of these three, as China would prefer a stable and nuclear North Korea to an unstable but nuke-free one. But it's still a big priority."
I guess collapse would also invite a load of american aid/soft power again via the South, which would also be undesirable. actually I guess that is point 1. A united pro-America Korea
Not venturing an opinion on most of the thread, but just to reply to Alex - I've always said that I don't make stuff up here but I don't necessarily report everything (I doubt if anyone does tbh). I was pretty confident in Broxtowe and had three reasons to think the Tories shared my assessment - might have been wrong, but I genuinely thought it. As the campaign approached the end I thought things were going increasingly wrong, and that the Tories had renewed their effort, but it seemed, well, unwise to say so. I've apologised to anyone who was misled by my earlier confidence, and will do so again - that's all I can say, really.
As I'm not playing an active role now, I don't really need to be selective anyway, so WYSIWYG.
Do you think most Broxtowe Conservatives arriving at the count expected to win or lose? I know they would say they were always expecting to win but that doesn't mean anything usually.
@ Dair and @ DuGarbandier. The Gospel according to the Washington Post- why China props up NK in six words:
"No war, no instability, no nukes.
"It's as much a strategy as it is a mantra, often rendered in the original Chinese: 不战、不乱、无核. And the order matters, listing China's priorities from highest to lowest.
"The first priority -- no war -- goes back to the Korean War, which cost hundreds of thousands of Chinese lives and almost ended with a unified, pro-American Korea right on China's border: Beijing's nightmare.
"The second priority -- no instability -- means that Beijing wants to keep North Korea from collapsing, which could cause China all sorts of problems -- streams of Korean refugees, loose nuclear materials (see priority No. 3) and the risk of the war that China so wants to avoid.
"The third priority -- no nukes -- is clearly last of these three, as China would prefer a stable and nuclear North Korea to an unstable but nuke-free one. But it's still a big priority."
I guess collapse would also invite a load of american aid/soft power again via the South, which would also be undesirable. actually I guess that is point 1. A united pro-America Korea
This is the first I've seen of a prominent Dem being open about the potential damage of Hillary's emails:
"Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said Wednesday that controversy over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server may derail her Democratic presidential bid.
"I just never feel I have a grasp of what the facts are. But clearly, she has handled it poorly from the first day. And there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest," ...
"I think if she intentionally misled or lied to the American people and did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules, if that is the ultimate conclusion, then I think she has disqualified herself," Yarmuth told WHAS." [from The Hill]
This is the first I've seen of a prominent Dem being open about the potential damage of Hillary's emails:
"Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said Wednesday that controversy over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server may derail her Democratic presidential bid.
"I just never feel I have a grasp of what the facts are. But clearly, she has handled it poorly from the first day. And there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest," ...
"I think if she intentionally misled or lied to the American people and did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules, if that is the ultimate conclusion, then I think she has disqualified herself," Yarmuth told WHAS." [from The Hill]
"did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules" This much seems obvious
This is the first I've seen of a prominent Dem being open about the potential damage of Hillary's emails:
"Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said Wednesday that controversy over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server may derail her Democratic presidential bid.
"I just never feel I have a grasp of what the facts are. But clearly, she has handled it poorly from the first day. And there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest," ...
"I think if she intentionally misled or lied to the American people and did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules, if that is the ultimate conclusion, then I think she has disqualified herself," Yarmuth told WHAS." [from The Hill]
I mentioned the other night that a punt against her in the nomination stakes was worth it. This just stinks of the divisiveness of Clinton that killed her run in 2008 and after so long burying that tag in recent years, its right there again.
A few other notable events that might upset some applecarts:
There are very notable Israeli strikes on Assad military positions in Syria and what seems to be a more notable air defence response. This has all been kicked off by rocket fire across the Golan into Northern Israel by Iranian backed surrogates. The Israelis saw this coming, they had been getting reports in recent days and weeks about trouble and knew where and who would be stirring it. For Assad, his Iranian pals sponsorship of this may in one way serve to offer a rallying cry to Syrians (led by brave Bashar) to take on their old enemy. In reality if Israel goes in heavy, it will be Assad who gets his war fighting capability well messed up which benefits no one..unless you are Iran and wish to strengthen your grip on the country via those very same surrogates. Ive mentioned before that some in Assad's inner circle really have a problem with the parallel forces Iran has built up in Syria.
Assad seems to be onboard at this point, assuming he is controlling his own military. State TV says the 40 year old ceasefire with Israel is over and this evening Syrian artillery has been lobbing shells across the border.
Something smells, probably chordite. The Israelis certainly don't look to be waiting to see if things calm down. Strikes are in the tens.
Koreas....Kim Jong Il has decided to order the army into a state of war according to one Chinese news agency. Doesn't he spout that kind of talk every month or is this different? You just dont know with that kid.
I think we should all remember the evil little cherub in happier times. Those who are bored may want to google 'Kim Jong Un looking at things'
This is the first I've seen of a prominent Dem being open about the potential damage of Hillary's emails:
"Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said Wednesday that controversy over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server may derail her Democratic presidential bid.
"I just never feel I have a grasp of what the facts are. But clearly, she has handled it poorly from the first day. And there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest," ...
"I think if she intentionally misled or lied to the American people and did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules, if that is the ultimate conclusion, then I think she has disqualified herself," Yarmuth told WHAS." [from The Hill]
I mentioned the other night that a punt against her in the nomination stakes was worth it. This just stinks of the divisiveness of Clinton that killed her run in 2008 and after so long burying that tag in recent years, its right there again.
A few other notable events that might upset some applecarts:
There are very notable Israeli strikes on Assad military positions in Syria and what seems to be a more notable air defence response. This has all been kicked off by rocket fire across the Golan into Northern Israel by Iranian backed surrogates. The Israelis saw this coming, they had been getting reports in recent days and weeks about trouble and knew where and who would be stirring it. For Assad, his Iranian pals sponsorship of this may in one way serve to offer a rallying cry to Syrians (led by brave Bashar) to take on their old enemy. In reality if Israel goes in heavy, it will be Assad who gets his war fighting capability well messed up which benefits no one..unless you are Iran and wish to strengthen your grip on the country via those very same surrogates. Ive mentioned before that some in Assad's inner circle really have a problem with the parallel forces Iran has built up in Syria.
Assad seems to be onboard at this point, assuming he is controlling his own military. State TV says the 40 year old ceasefire with Israel is over and this evening Syrian artillery has been lobbing shells across the border.
Something smells, probably chordite. The Israelis certainly don't look to be waiting to see if things calm down. Strikes are in the tens.
Koreas....Kim Jong Il has decided to order the army into a state of war according to one Chinese news agency. Doesn't he spout that kind of talk every month or is this different? You just dont know with that kid.
I think we should all remember the evil little cherub in happier times. Those who are bored may want to google 'Kim Jong Un looking at things'
Yokel, thanks for the updates. The Golan stuff looks to me more serious than North Korea - aren't they overdue for their next hissy fit?
@ ScottP and @ TimB - Uh-oh! What did I tell you? Bust!!
"Griffin was under constant pressure on Thursday, taking three sacks and several hits through four series. He was 2-of-5 passing for 8 yards and fumbled twice before leaving the game."
@ ScottP and @ TimB - Uh-oh! What did I tell you? Bust!!
"Griffin was under constant pressure on Thursday, taking three sacks and several hits through four series. He was 2-of-5 passing for 8 yards and fumbled twice before leaving the game."
You need to let go emotionally. RGIII still says he's the best QB in the NFL. Just let the Washington Native American Warriors go, adopt America's Team, and the pain will stop. When you come out of the tunnel, I will be there.
Not venturing an opinion on most of the thread, but just to reply to Alex - I've always said that I don't make stuff up here but I don't necessarily report everything (I doubt if anyone does tbh). I was pretty confident in Broxtowe and had three reasons to think the Tories shared my assessment - might have been wrong, but I genuinely thought it. As the campaign approached the end I thought things were going increasingly wrong, and that the Tories had renewed their effort, but it seemed, well, unwise to say so. I've apologised to anyone who was misled by my earlier confidence, and will do so again - that's all I can say, really.
As I'm not playing an active role now, I don't really need to be selective anyway, so WYSIWYG.
Thanks for that, Nick.
I think you are getting a bit too much personal stick on this thread. Perhaps people should have remembered always to be skeptical about public pronouncements by practicing politicians.
Now all that is needed is for you to support hunting and the experimental badger culls :-) .
On Corbyn, I think - with the latest article from Dan Hodges - that there's a fair chance a Corbyn victory will be the death / serious marginalisation of Labour for decades. He has too much baggage to spend the next 3 years in a policy seminar with members, and too many of his declared policies are away with the fairies. I don't believe that a majority of Brits will fall for this particular pup.
Embracing the economics of Richard Murphy is one thing that has not helped. There is also the slight problem of comparing the "failure" of austerity with the "success" of far-leftery; I suspect most Brits will choose the failure of economic growth and low unemployment.
>Rihanna does present some interesting topics. Attractive, talented and rich yet still she went back to the bloke who was convicted of assaulting her:
>In many ways this is similar to jihadi brides running off to be subjugated. They are capable of much more in life yet consciously make a bad choice.
>Many times people build their own cages and chains. Freedom is often quite a threat at first.
>Lewis Hamilton -'a good Christian boy'? Hardly - he 's been living in sin for years. Fornication not compatible with Christian principles.
Life is often more complicated than many of us third parties like to recognise.
Many people put up with non-existent sex lives or dead marriages for the sake of not visiting the trauma of divorce on their children until they leave home.
In many ways that is very commendable, and I think it needs to be said.
> Even in the Church of England.
One of the things I like about the CofE is that it can be recognised that life is not tidy, that good can be positively recognised in situations that may not be perfect, and that relationships may change or grow.
Comments
I'll tell you what, you sort out your own head and express your self in a non-incoherent manner, and I'll take charge of what I can & can't admit. If you think a PB thread is something I have a need to be in line with, I suspect you may have had an attack of the thick.
Obviously, my statement is rubbish. I wouldn't deny it. But your statement was lazy because it ignores second order effects.
the non apology apology
its crap and you know it.
I DID put forward an argument regarding the influence of the media - which you didn't accept.
I do wonder, as you say in your first post, that the literature is attempting to draw a link to psychological distubance, this still indicates way higher levels of such things than I would think is reasonably likely.
At what stage does something which is near universal stop being a neurosis and start being just "how people are".
The Conservative vote in May this year was 1120; the Lib Dems did not even have a candidate then.
I don't know what quite to say to bring you up to modernity. Times move on from Babs Windsor in Carry on Camping to Rihanna. The end result may be quite similar to us blokes, but somehow it feels like we have moved on forty years. I cannot explain the whys and wherefores. Someone else please.
Without consent? With a particular ferocity? I don't really understand what you mean and how you are differentiating this from rape.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6913038
In many ways this is similar to jihadi brides running off to be subjugated. They are capable of much more in life yet consciously make a bad choice.
Many times people build their own cages and chains. Freedom is often quite a threat at first.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11815293/German-border-control-plans-raise-hopes-for-EU-reform.html
And diminished himself in the process.
Fuck off>cunty>fuck you
Who's blustering again?
Kim Jong un has ordered all of his military forces to have full readiness for war.
(Think we have been here before , more than once....)
If you did, you would understand how they are built on trust, communication and consent. There should always be a proper dialogue as to the detail of what both parties expect and will allow.
It is perfectly possible to establish the parameters for 'rape' play that are fully consensual - it is just that the scenario has been negotiated in advance.
It is a grey area of the law (post-Spanner) but proper BDSM is not about abuse - it is all about consent and communication.
No-one is choosing a BDSM or similar relationship because they fantasise about communication. They do it because they have an underlying desire to be Sub, Dom or Switch.
Let's hope that Lewis Hamilton, a good christian boy, treats her better than the other one.
But, as my wife knows and fully understands, I think she would forgive me having a quick fling with Rihanna if circumstances permitted. Similarly, I would turn a blind eye to Brad Pitt and Hugh Jackman.
Winston Churchill, on the IRA, led by Michael Collins, 1919
“He was an Irish patriot true and fearless.”
Winston Churchill, on Michael Collins, leader of the IRA, 1922...
He has encountered in his first few weeks four men (straight and gay) with lacerations through their sphincter by immersing objects- deodorant cans and wotnot.
I can't quite see where any pleasure comes in any of this. Apparently there is G spot somewhere up there, but it all sounds very painful.
Anyway, on that happy note, I am off to sleep and to dream happily of Rihanna
I expect Tyson to be thinking that Britain should be taking Germany's share as well.
I think Kim is losing his grip and one of Communisms last regimes is in its death throes.
Re-Unification of Korea would be several orders of magnitude more of a challenge than Germany faced.
http://nypost.com/2015/08/20/all-signs-point-to-joe-biden-jumping-into-2016-race/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33977636?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Her judgment is looking ever more questionable. When you get a clearance they sit you down and tell you in detail what you have to do - and NOT do. She seems to have ignored the whole thing.
But the Democrats are clearly worried about Hillary's FBI problem, and pressure is building on him to run.
As I'm not playing an active role now, I don't really need to be selective anyway, so WYSIWYG.
On a practical level I suppose they don't want any shocks to their economy which looks fairly unpredictable without any outside events
"No war, no instability, no nukes.
"It's as much a strategy as it is a mantra, often rendered in the original Chinese: 不战、不乱、无核. And the order matters, listing China's priorities from highest to lowest.
"The first priority -- no war -- goes back to the Korean War, which cost hundreds of thousands of Chinese lives and almost ended with a unified, pro-American Korea right on China's border: Beijing's nightmare.
"The second priority -- no instability -- means that Beijing wants to keep North Korea from collapsing, which could cause China all sorts of problems -- streams of Korean refugees, loose nuclear materials (see priority No. 3) and the risk of the war that China so wants to avoid.
"The third priority -- no nukes -- is clearly last of these three, as China would prefer a stable and nuclear North Korea to an unstable but nuke-free one. But it's still a big priority."
"Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) said Wednesday that controversy over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server may derail her Democratic presidential bid.
"I just never feel I have a grasp of what the facts are. But clearly, she has handled it poorly from the first day. And there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest," ...
"I think if she intentionally misled or lied to the American people and did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules, if that is the ultimate conclusion, then I think she has disqualified herself," Yarmuth told WHAS." [from The Hill]
A few other notable events that might upset some applecarts:
There are very notable Israeli strikes on Assad military positions in Syria and what seems to be a more notable air defence response. This has all been kicked off by rocket fire across the Golan into Northern Israel by Iranian backed surrogates. The Israelis saw this coming, they had been getting reports in recent days and weeks about trouble and knew where and who would be stirring it. For Assad, his Iranian pals sponsorship of this may in one way serve to offer a rallying cry to Syrians (led by brave Bashar) to take on their old enemy. In reality if Israel goes in heavy, it will be Assad who gets his war fighting capability well messed up which benefits no one..unless you are Iran and wish to strengthen your grip on the country via those very same surrogates. Ive mentioned before that some in Assad's inner circle really have a problem with the parallel forces Iran has built up in Syria.
Assad seems to be onboard at this point, assuming he is controlling his own military. State TV says the 40 year old ceasefire with Israel is over and this evening Syrian artillery has been lobbing shells across the border.
Something smells, probably chordite. The Israelis certainly don't look to be waiting to see if things calm down. Strikes are in the tens.
Koreas....Kim Jong Il has decided to order the army into a state of war according to one Chinese news agency. Doesn't he spout that kind of talk every month or is this different?
You just dont know with that kid.
I think we should all remember the evil little cherub in happier times. Those who are bored may want to google 'Kim Jong Un looking at things'
"Griffin was under constant pressure on Thursday, taking three sacks and several hits through four series. He was 2-of-5 passing for 8 yards and fumbled twice before leaving the game."
perhaps Chinese historical education is in need of a revamp as much as the Japanese type..
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/17/bloggers-ridicule-chinese-film-placing-mao-zedong-at-key-wartime-conference
It's copacetic.
I think you are getting a bit too much personal stick on this thread. Perhaps people should have remembered always to be skeptical about public pronouncements by practicing politicians.
Now all that is needed is for you to support hunting and the experimental badger culls :-) .
On Corbyn, I think - with the latest article from Dan Hodges - that there's a fair chance a Corbyn victory will be the death / serious marginalisation of Labour for decades. He has too much baggage to spend the next 3 years in a policy seminar with members, and too many of his declared policies are away with the fairies. I don't believe that a majority of Brits will fall for this particular pup.
Embracing the economics of Richard Murphy is one thing that has not helped. There is also the slight problem of comparing the "failure" of austerity with the "success" of far-leftery; I suspect most Brits will choose the failure of economic growth and low unemployment.
>In many ways this is similar to jihadi brides running off to be subjugated. They are capable of much more in life yet consciously make a bad choice.
>Many times people build their own cages and chains. Freedom is often quite a threat at first.
>Lewis Hamilton -'a good Christian boy'? Hardly - he 's been living in sin for years. Fornication not compatible with Christian principles.
Life is often more complicated than many of us third parties like to recognise.
Many people put up with non-existent sex lives or dead marriages for the sake of not visiting the trauma of divorce on their children until they leave home.
In many ways that is very commendable, and I think it needs to be said.
> Even in the Church of England.
One of the things I like about the CofE is that it can be recognised that life is not tidy, that good can be positively recognised in situations that may not be perfect, and that relationships may change or grow.